INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Centrality of Gender in the Education System of Zimbabwe in the 21^st

Century.

Tafara

University of Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.1210000263

Received: 27 October 2025; Accepted: 03 November 2025; Published: 18 November 2025

ABSTRACT

Gender dynamics and gender trajectories and their impact on education systems have long been a verdant

trope of scholarly inquiry and policy focus. The centrality of gender in shaping educational opportunities and

outcomes, resource allocation, and societal perceptions cannot be overstated in pedagogical and learning

spaces, particularly in the context of developing nations like Zimbabwe. The present article critically delves

into the multifaceted and multipronged dimensions of gender, its formation and its pervasive influence on the

Zimbabwean education system in the 21st century. The phenomenon of gender is explored through a

sociological lens particularly rooted in the process of socialisation, revealing its construction as an unintended

outcome of interactions between social actors of different sexes and societal structures. Gender is not merely a

biological distinction but a complex interplay of socially assigned attributes, opportunities, and relationships

that are learned through the process of socialization. Within the realm of formal education in Zimbabwe,

gender plays a pivotal role in defining the allocation of resources, opportunities, and duties along gender lines.

The article examines how patriarchal norms and ideologies have led to preferential treatment of boys over

girls, perpetuating gender inequalities in areas such as access to education, resource allocation, and

empowerment opportunities. In the same stride, the article investigates the role of language, hidden curricula,

and societal norms in shaping gender perceptions and reinforcing stereotypes. It delves into how gender

assumptions and expectations influence the educational experiences of boys and girls, impacting their

academic performance, career choices, and prospects. By critically examining the centrality of gender in the

Zimbabwean education system, the article aims to shed light on the complex dynamics at play and the need

for concerted efforts to address gender inequalities and promote equal opportunities for all students, regardless

of their gender.

Keywords: Gender equality, masculinity, feminity, gender stereotypes, gender association, language and

gender, hidden curriculum.

INTRODUCTION

The gender phenomenon in its varied dimensions is placed under the spotlight. Gender is defined

sociologically and as a socialising phenomenon. It is presented as an unintended outcome of the interactions

between social actors of different sexes; and between social actors and societal structures within aparticular

geo-political context or milieu(Alesina et al, 2010). Gender is largely explored within the sphere of formal

education in Zimbabwe. It is examined in terms of how it defines the allocation of resources, opportunities,

and duties along sex lines. How it is highly influenced by patriarchy to favour men for more remunerating

positions in the Ministry of Education is examined. It exploits the social relations between men and women;

and between boys and girls for its continued existence. Gender strains the relations between the two sexes:

male and female. How gender produces femininity and masculinity phenomena in society is explored in this

article. The qualities of males are less favoured by females and vice versa. Paradoxically, the two sexes are

put in tension and co-exist as competing enemies though working for each other’s common good. The

tensions between men and women provide fodder for the parasitic gender inequities to thrive. Gender

therefore, examine the advancement of gender-based stereotypes, analysing language and its outstanding place

Page 3040

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

in gender formation. Different foci but all drawing from sociological theories are looked at in terms of how

they shed light on the social construction of gender in various facets of mainstream society. Gender is

presented as a product of the struggles for scarce opportunities in the education system of Zimbabwe.

The adverse effects of gender construction and how it influence educational outcomes and opportunities in

pedagogical contexts or settings have been canvassed in the growing body of literature in the interface

between the construction of gender, gender dynamics and equity in education. In the rural settings, cultural

relations which shape gender roles is more pronounced with girls and children bearing the adverse effects

thereof, through receiving poor educational opportunities and outcomes. In urban spaces, where there is little

emphasis on gender roles, literacy levels are higher (Mintso, 1997). There is, therefore, need to accelerate

gender equity which requires policy considerations (Gachukia, 2018). Although the trope of gender

construction has been canvassed in educational literature, little has been explored in the intersectionality

between gender roles, institutional buttressing of gender constructed which have already been culturally

shaped and their impact on educational opportunities and outcomes. It is this missing gap in the current body

of literature which this article will critically examine.

METHODOLOGY

The article is produced out of an in-depth study of secondary academic sources and considerable knowledge

of developments in the education system of Zimbabwe rooted in the qualitative research methodological

paradigm. The secondary academic sources comprise peer reviewed journal articles, research papers and

published edited books. Such varied documentary review spice up the broadening of the existing body of

knowledge. Building the article on already existing scholarly works furthers the multi-disciplinary enrichment

of academic research needed for the achievement of excellence in the field of gender. Credibility of the article

is high for it is based on scientifically proven foundations.

Understanding gender

Gender refers to the social attributes and opportunities associated with being male and female; the relations

between women and men and between boys and girls (Doreen, 2001; Alesina et al., 2010). The attributes,

opportunities and relationships are socially constructed and learned through socialisation. Socialisation is

conceived as the process of cultural learning and social development whereby a new person acquires

necessary skills and education to play regular part in a social system (Parsons, 1961). Socialisation is the

acquisition of the requisite orientations for satisfactory functioning in a role. It is a phenomenon which

comprises the transmission of values, beliefs, practices, taboos and avoidances of a given society to an

individual through formal and informal means through the agents of socialisation like home, peer group and

school. Through socialisation, a growing individual learns to behave as per the expectations of the society. An

individual learns the reciprocal responses of the society so that he can anticipate the behaviour of others

towards him and his own behaviour to peers.

Socialisation is the engine for the advancement of the culture of a given society. According to Moore (1987:

4), culture is defined as follows: “A culture is the whole set of beliefs and guidelines as to how people ought

to behave in any society that people regard as natural and normal.” Thus, culture is learned from contact with

other people around us in society. Gender is centrally placed in culture. Gender is context-bound and time-

specific and ever-changing in shaping the social structure of a given society. It assumes various dimensions in

different societies; though in some instances it may cut across geographical and societal boundaries. The

social structure of a given society refers to an institutional structure comprising cultural and normative

models that define the actors’ expectations on their behaviour (Bernardi, 2011). It points to an ordered or

organized arrangement of elements like education, politics, religion, economy to make up a coherent whole

(society). Gender is produced within the organisation of societal institutions above to reduce friction.

Gender determines what is expected, allowed and valued for women as opposed to men in a given socio-

cultural context. Thus, gender is part and parcel of the institutional package of a given organisation and

society. Gender defines differences and inequalities between women and men in decision-making

opportunities, role assignment, and access to and control over privileges and resources in many African

Page 3041

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

societies. Gender is part of the broader essential criteria for sociocultural analysis featuring among class, race

and poverty levels. It is rooted in the assumptions and ideas of social actors in terms of how they define the

relationship between men and women with their social surroundings. Gender points to the social. Roles that

men and women play and the power relations between them. Such power relations have a profound effect on

the access and distribution of scarce social and economic opportunities in society.

Gender is so vital to an extent of constraining coercive force on social interactions and moulding behavioural

trends of a given society. It does this in clearly and physically visible means. In most rural localities of

Zimbabwe, dressing is used for reflecting the gender values of the society. Typical rural women wear long

dresses and men wear trousers. Women sit down on mats on the ground while men sit on stools and different

raised structures. The sitting of women on the ground sociologically portrays their lowly socially defined

societal position. The sitting of men on raised stools reflects their upper position in society. Thus, gender is

central to the construction of masculinity and femininity. Masculinity refers to traits that are stereotypically

attributed to men, is typified by the image of a strong, technically competent, ambitious, self-sufficient and

authoritative leader who can maintain control over his emotions (Lefkowitz and Zeldow, 2006).

Femininity comprises traits that are stereotypically attributed to women, is associated with empathy,

sensitivity, loyalty, and a caring disposition (Heilman, 2012). Femininity and masculinity are rooted in an

intricate system of socio-cultural contexts rather than mere psycho-biological factors (Borgata and

Montgomery, 2000). Commonly held assumptions are that not only do men and women differ, but they also

tend to act like polar opposites, with women appearing to lack the qualities that are most prevalent in men and

vice versa. In this respect, dominance, resilience, aggression, bravery and versatility are acceptable traits in

men; but less socially acceptable in women in many societies especially of non-western roots (Zokaei et al.,

2001; Ozkan and Lajunen, 2005). In contrast, women are permitted to display weakness whereas this is

unacceptable in men (Rudman et al., 2008). Such socially upheld notions go a long way in exerting influence

on central operations of different communities.

Based on the assumptions of masculinity and femininity above, men are more preferred for promotions to

headship positions in rural schools of Zimbabwe where unforeseeable challenges surface and calling for

immediate counter responses. Recruitment into the army, police and prison services in Zimbabwe is tilted in

favour of men than women based on the above outlined gender-based notions. The above mentioned gender-

based characterisations are rampant across various cultures, racial and ethnic divide, time spans and diverse

employment settings (Schein, 2001; Ozkan and Lajunen, 2005). Gender is highly shaped by economic

determinants of a society. In this regard, men receive more opportunities and more scarce resources than

women for instance; in the typical African home in Zimbabwe, the back of a chicken belongs to the father on

the basis of it being the biggest part of the chicken. The big domestic livestock like cattle are controlled by the

father while poultry is under the control of the mother in the home.

Such engenderisation of the private and public spheres of the society results in huge disparities between men

and women (Rudman et al., 2008; Xiumei et al., 2012). In related trends, women award themselves lower

wages, are less likely to demand equivalent wages and are more satisfied to receive lower earnings than their

male counterparts (Wajcman, 2000; Williams et al., 2010). However, men and women are not always

passively shaped by gender-typical behaviour. They sometimes call upon their power of agency that

capacitates them to develop peculiar gender traits best suited to save desperate situations in which they are

caught up (Forseth, 2005). Men and women are not born with masculinity and femininity as part of their

genetic make-up. Rather, they adopt masculinity and femininity concepts through acculturation (Berger et al.,

1995).

Furthermore, what is regarded as gender-appropriate can alter over time, and gender assumptions are

invariably interpolated by cultural, historical and geographical location-related factors (Cornwall and

Lindisfarne, 1994). The combined effect of gender equality, feminism has challenged traditional concepts

formed of feminine women and masculine men (Wayne and Cordeiro, 2003). In considering these patterns,

some women develop and adopt masculine personality traits, and maximize their use based on gender-atypical

behaviours. As such, gender inequality is socially constructed and bears huge economic connotations in

favour of men.

Page 3042

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Background to the pervasiveness of gender in education

According to UNESCO (2011), gender inequality refers to unequal possession of opportunities between men

and women in the realisation of their human rights and unequal potential to contribute to political, economic,

social and cultural development of their society. Gender inequality in education points to unequal educational

opportunities that encompass access, retention and learning for girls and boys. Gender inequality in schools

occurs if educational systems in terms of contents, learning materials, teacher attitudes and behaviours,

classroom and discipline practices are organised in ways that depict biased social norms about the expected

roles and opportunities for boys as opposed to girls (Myers, 2007). Zimbabwe worked hard to achieve gender

equality since its political independence in 1980. In its commitment to curb different forms of sex

discrimination, the government of Zimbabwe is a signatory to many international gender declarations and

conventions.

It is a signatory to the 1979 United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination

against Women. Following that, the Zimbabwe government put in place a number of policies to advance

gender equality. These include the gender affirmative action policy of 1992, the 1999 Nziramasanga

Commission, and the National Gender Policy of 2004. Despite the concerted efforts by the government,

gender inequality is still pervasive in schools and the education system. The gender inequality dynamics

influence the manner in which boys and girls are given differential treatment in schools. Gender inequality

affects male and female teachers in terms of appointments to senior positions and school administrative posts

(Vaughan, 2016).

Preferential treatment of boys over girls in schools

Women constitute half of humanity (UNICEF, 2007). Despite them constituting such a significant percentage

of the world population, most societies place more emphasis on educating males. Of the 781 million illiterate

adults worldwide, two thirds of them are women (United Nations Report, 2010). This is rooted in the unabated

ancient practice of focusing women’s education on skills that prepare girls to be wives and homemakers.

There has been a role assignment and division of responsibility between men and women. Men were regarded

as the bread-earners for the family; while women were regarded as homemakers, mothers and nurturers. As

such in poverty-stricken communities of Africa Zimbabwe included), families prioritise boys to girls when

resources become depleted in terms of meeting educational expenses like buying books, school bags and

uniforms.

The girls are usually discouraged from acquisition of education, due to limited financial resources. Their male

siblings may teach them, what they will have learned at school that just enhances their basic literacy skills of

reading and writing. Additionally, a lack of appropriate school facilities like classrooms, playgrounds,

libraries cause learners to drop out before their educational skills are well sharpened. This affects girls more

than boys for girls are socialised to like the home and domestic chores more than anything else by patriarchy.

In Zimbabwe, there is a tendency by the ministry of education to promote boys’ high schools like Churchill

boys’ high school in international sporting activities at the expense of girls’ high schools like Harare Girls’

High School. Such unfair treatment of schools along sex lines is tantamount to gender inequality in education.

Ideology and gendered distribution of headship positions in education

The structural arrangement that initiates and legitimises the systematic oppression of girls is heavily

embedded in patriarchy and structured power dynamics or trajectories that characterizes the Zimbabwean

society. Schools act as vehicles for transmitting the values of the society in which they are situated. In this

way, schools find themselves propagating patriarchal values that are oppressive to women. Atypical example

is when female learners are called upon to engage in the cleaning of classrooms at school that is time-

consuming while boys engage in lighter tasks. The preparation of food for visitors to the school and the

washing of club uniforms of the school is allocated to girls alone. This is caused by patriarchy that according

to Hartmann (2002), is an ideology premised on the supremacy of males over females that enables the boys to

dominate girls at school.

Page 3043

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

The scenario is vehemently opposed by feminists. Feminism as a perspective emphasizes the belief that

women and men are equal and should be equally valued, and having equal rights (Odaga and Heneveld,

1995). In addition to that, there are more male school administrators and science teachers than females in

zimbabwe (Chabaya et al., 2009). Many female teachers have university degrees and relevant teaching

experience that qualify them to become school heads. However, glass ceilings are placed on their way to

prevent them from promotions to headship positions. As argued by Chabaya et al. (2009), as of June 2004,

there were 246 secondary school heads in Masvingo province. However, only 14 (5.60%) were female heads

and 8 (3.25%) were female deputy heads. In the case of primary schools, there were a total of 693 school

heads and only 68 (9.81%) were female heads while 56 (8.08%) were female deputy heads (Chabaya, et al.,

2009).

In the case of universities, Gaidzamwa (1992:10) pointed out that “the University (of Zimbabwe) provided an

atmosphere and opportunities for female academics with little experience to join in administration, but the

higher levels of university administration remained male dominated”. While females chose careers with less

struggles and conflicts, such choices made them economically exposed as compared to males. According to

Budig (2002; Franzway et al., 2009), personality traits are essential human capital characteristics that signal

vital employee productivity assets. Positive associations existing between males, masculinity and wealth have

been scientifically proved (Williams et al., 2010). Leadership capability is signalled through masculinity that,

in turn, is accompanied by workplace rewards (Franzway et al., 2009; Williams et al., 2010).

Thus, it is arguably sound that the few female school heads above minimize their feminine associations and

engage in compensatory gendered practices to assume dominant positions as their masculine traits become an

important production asset to the government Ministry of Education that runs schools in Zimbabwe. the

attitudes held by women who excel in their careers include high self-efficacy, a strong desire to succeed and

provide leadership and the general adoption of career, as opposed to family identity; that result in them being

social outcasts in the mainstream societies of their origin (Eagly et al., 2000; Koenig et al., 2011). Women

are becoming more similar to men in terms of their career aspirations and achievements. They are also more

inclined to view themselves as possessing qualities associated with strong leadership (Dennis and Kunkel,

2004; Vongas and Al Hajj, 2015). The social ostracism that comes with divergence from the culturally upheld

femininity beliefs of docility and shyness scare away many professionally competent women from fighting for

leadership positions in the education system in Zimbabwe.

Explained from a different angle, the gendered constraints of girls in education are positioned in the

hegemonic base of the Zimbabwean society. Hegemony refers to forms of supremacy obtained by some social

groups (boys in this case) primarily by consent rather than coercion, by moral and intellectual leadership

rather than by domination (Christie, 2008). The power of a leading social group is maintained by a

combination of consent and coercion; however, consent through ideological justification occurs in societies

influenced by capitalism like Zimbabwe with coercion visible only in moments of particular crisis (Gramsci,

1994). In its broadest sense, hegemony is a relational concept that includes consideration of relations of

coercion and consent in the maintenance of control.

Looking-glass concept

Cooley coined the phrase looking glass self to denote the view that individuals tend to react in terms of their

self-concepts as communicated to them by others especially their significant others (Mead, 1934). Therefore,

the meanings that individuals come to perceive themselves in terms of are a social construct. Girls avoid

challenging tasks in their academic careers for they act in ways reflected by teachers who perceive them as

weak. Through role taking, individuals develop a concept of self and by placing themselves in the position of

others they are able to emulate others and reflect upon themselves. It is widely assumed that women are

mothers, wives and breadwinners in their homes (Genene, 2003). So, to some female students, the assumption

is that is no need to work hard academically as their roles in life are pre-determined by society. In other

words, after being highly educated, the best place of a girl remains in the home as a mother or daughter and

not in the office as a school headmistress. In a study, Mwaba (1992) cited in (Mapuranga and Chikumbu,

2015) found that a sample of South African secondary school boys and girls characterised housecleaning as

Page 3044

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

predominantly women-only jobs. This negatively affects girls’ performance in schools. Thus, in the southern

African region, girls are educated for the realisation of their domesticity societal roles.

Language and gender formation

Dudu et al. (2008) posit that language is a major contributing component of gender stereotypes. The English

language denigrates and debases women when it treats them as exceptions. A boy is a real poet while a girl is

a poetess. A man is a real headmaster while the lady teacher is a headmistress. In the school drama club, a boy

is an actor while a girl is an actress. This trivialises female gender forms. Deriving the feminine form from the

masculine suggests women are mere extensions and appendages of men. In addition to that, such gender

connotations extend to some names of female learners. Names such as Georgina, Francina and Francisca,

Henrietta, Josephine and Ragina are derivations from George, Francis, Henry, Joseph and Ragies (Unger and

Crawford, 1992). In addition to that, the name John for boys has Johanna and Joanne being derived and given

to girls.

Alfonse is a name for boys while Alfornsena is derived and given to girls. Similarly in the Shona language

spoken by the majority of indigenous Zimbabweans, male names have female derivations. Farai being a boy

has Farisai as the female derivation. Namatirai a female name is derived from boys’ name Namatai. Ripai is a

name given to boys while Ripirwai is derived and given to girls. Shupai is for boys while Shupikai is the

derivative name for girls. Dadai is a name for boys while Dadirai is the derivative given to girls. Ruramai for

boys has Ruramisai as its female derivation. In the Shona names above, the derivative names for girls are

founded on instrumental connotations reflecting high degrees of passiveness and helplessness in desperate

situations of society.

On the other hand, the original names are decorated with connotations of agency; reflecting the boys as having

the instinct to turn around desperate situations and causing action in driving the engines of society. Such a

scenario of girls being portrayed as instrumental and boys as agents stems from the patriarchal nature of the

Shona society in Zimbabwe. Such a philosophy results in teachers having higher regard for boys than female

learners. Out of that, the head boy is placed in an upper position by the school administration than the head

girl in terms of treatments and favours while on paper, the positions of the two are the same within the school

setting.

Likewise, Sir and madam are respectable terms used to address male and female teachers in Zimbabwean

schools respectively. However, the term madam can also refer to a brothel-keeper, while a pimp can never be

addressed as sir. This shows how much female titles in the school have been debased to assume sexual

connotations. Language and images used in school textbooks and teaching materials influence students’

gender perceptions. In some Chemistry and Physics textbooks, pictures are drawn of a boy carrying out an

experiment and a girl reading the results of the experiment; that debases the position of the girl in the learning

scenario. Through the hidden curriculum, a girl is portrayed as having weaker aptitude than her male

counterpart in this case.

Hidden curriculum and gender formation

The hidden curriculum is implemented in many instances in the school to determine the various placements of

boys and girls. In most schools, learners in secondary school are put in different classes at form 3. The hard

sciences class is in most cases dominated by boys. Most of the girls are placed in the commercials and arts

classes. The placement of more boys in the hard sciences class gives them advantage over the girls for the

learning of biology, physics and chemistry widens their career choices and places them on a path to more

paying jobs after completing A level and tertiary-training. From the arts classes, the girls end up being clerks,

cooks, and language teachers; jobs that are not highly remunerating as compared to engineering, medicine

professions pursued by boys from the hard sciences classes.

Adding on to the matter of differential treatment, boys’ football is given 90 minutes while girl’s netball is

given 30 minutes. This gives more time to boys in terms of using the school facilities yet both pay the same

school fees. Through the hidden curriculum, boys are portrayed as stronger than girls in terms of physical

Page 3045

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

fitness. In athletics, girls are mostly confined to short distances while boys engage in long distances. Again,

this reflects girls as members of the weaker sex. When addressing learners at school, teachers always say

“Good morning boys and girls”. The sequence of sex in the addressing statement always starts with boys and

ending with girls. Such a standing arrangement of sexes gives more respect to boys than girls.

On the other hand, a study by Chabaya et al. (2009) gives family attachment as a major obstacle for female

teachers’ denial of school headship positions. Most female teachers prefer to stay with their families rather

than pursuing career advancement in places away from the family. This is caused by the fact that “from an

early age, daughters are groomed for their marriage roles of wife, mother and food provider and they are

conditioned from an early age to believe that a woman is inferior to a man and that her place is in the home”

(Dorsey, 1996:30). In South Africa, female teachers usually deny promotions in distant schools from the

locations of their husbands who culturally decide family residence (Mahlase, 1997:90). More so, Women’s

low self-esteem and lack of confidence, myths, stereotypes and prejudices related to femininity act as

hindrances resulting in low uptake of school headship positions by women (Coleman, 2001:7).

Aschwanden in (Sebakwane, 1994) argues that gender socialisation is practiced, not to prejudice the child

against the other sex, but to let it grow “naturally “ into its predestined role and to make the child look forward

with pleasure to its predetermined task. In this respect, personality traits are perceived as productivity-related

attributes. They have the capacity to influence wages and preferences; that can affect education and job

choices. This then culminates into either positive or negative workplace biases (Heckman et al., 2006;

Mueller and Plug, 2006). In order for a girl to be socially acceptable both at school and in the society, she has

to meet the societal standards of qualifying femininity. In most African societies, the standards include

passiveness, domesticity, shyness, purity, submissiveness, and piety (Isazadegan et al., 2013; Abedi et al.,

2015). Domesticity locates a woman in the home; in charge of the fireplace; cooking for the family; taking

care of the kids and caring for sick and old relatives of her husband.

All of the above feminine duties comprise unpaid work in different countries including Zimbabwe (Ferrant,

2014; Jafari, 2014). Based on these feminine assumptions, women are most favoured for social work and

nursing qualifications in the field of academia. Purity and piety are high cardinal virtues associated with

femininity. A young and typical girl in cultured rural localities should be pure (virgin). Having lost her

virginity, the young woman is of low societal value. Associated with that is piety. Women are believed to be

holier than men as reflected by their tenderness, shyness and kindness (Kazemipour, 2004; Qarakhani and

Masoumeh, 2007). As a result, high school girls in Zimbabwe avoid too much involvement in sporting

activities at school that are likely to break their virginity accidentally like cycling and high jump. When a

young lady gets married with her virginity intact, her husband pays a cow to her parents for her purity and as a

way of showing his gratitude over the pure state of his wife in Zimbabwe.

In Zimbabwe, ladies are culturally expected to be submissive to their husbands. They are culturally trained to

be submissive from tender ages of around 12 years as they enter the individuation stage. A combination of the

standards above produce a person who is very humble and fragile; who avoids fora and classes where boys are

dominant of which such areas will be highly rewarding like the hard sciences class in the school and the

public sphere in the society. Thus, girls are socialised to be weak and highly drained in terms of the fighting

spirit that is needed for them to undertake the hard sciences subjects like physics, maths and chemistry whose

enrolment is dominated by boys in Zimbabwean high schools. While gender has made big in-roads into the

Zimbabwean education system, the country’s curriculum is being driven by postmodernism that is

outmanoeuvring masculinity and femininity gender-based notions through the centralization of multiple

realities in society.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, gender inequality refers to the socially constructed perceptions of viewing boys and girls in a

school environment by way of debasing girls through covert and overt means. Masculine personality traits

increase competency levels and are usually exploited by men due to their patriarchal acculturation; with few

women experiencing the same under strict conditions of social ostracism from their societies of origin.

Teachers need to refrain from the use of biased, sexist, stereotypical and prejudicial discourses in their

Page 3046

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

interaction with learners. The school curricula should de-construct the gender roles and stereotypes embedded

in it. Gender inclusive language should be employed in schools. The use of images like photographs,

illustrations and book covers should promote equal treatment of boys and girls within the school environment

and in career choice preparation after finishing high school.

The school as an institution serves as an agent of the dissemination of gender inequality embodied in the

curricula in both the formal and hidden forms. The school transforms boys and girls from being humans to

being persons who are socially defined in terms of given social contexts. As such, transitional measures should

be put in place to reduce the influence of the wider society on the school; and increase the influence of the

school on its external environment largely comprising the local society in which it operates. The reversal of the

relationship reduces the coercive force of some patriarchal values and traditional practices that favour boys at

the detriment of girls; for the acceptance of gender inequality on the part of girls is not strictly voluntary.

Rather, girls may support gender inequality scenarios from a sense of commitment or out of having no

alternative.

REFERENCE

1. Abedi, Fatemeh, Fatemeh Bagherian, and Mohammad Ali Mazaheri. 2015. Investigating Young Iranian

Women’s Understanding of Femininity Norms. Social Cognition 4: 84–96. (In Farsi)

2. Alesina, Alberto, Paola Giuliano, and Nathan Nunn. 2010. On the Origins of Gender Roles: Women

and the Plough. Cambridge: Harvard University.

3. Berger, M. Wallis, B. and Watson, S. (1995). Constructing masculinity. London: Routledge.

4. BERNARDI F. (2011), The Sociology of Social Structure 21st Century Sociology. SAGE Publications.

5. Borgata, Edgar, and Rhonda Montgomery. 2000. Encyclopedia of Sociology. New York: Macmillan.

6. Budig, M. J. (2002). Male Advantage and the Gender Composition of Jobs: Who Rides the Glass

Escalator? Social Problems, Vol. 49, No. 2, pp. 258-277.

7. Coleman M 2001. Achievement against the Odds: the Female Secondary Head Teachers in England

and Wales. Journal of School Leadership and Management, 21:75-100.

8. Cornwall, A. and Lindisfarne, N. (1994). Dislocating Masculinity: Comparative Ethnographies.

London: Routledge.

9. Chabaya O, Rembe S, and Wadesango N, (2009). The Persistence of Gender inequality in Zimbabwe.

South Africa Journal of Education, Vol.29:235-251.

10. Christie P. (2008), Changing Schools in South Africa: Opening the Doors of Learning. Johannesburg:

Heinemann

11. Dennis, M. R. and Kunkel, A. D. (2004). Perceptions of Men, Women, and CEOs: The Effects of

Gender Identity, Social Behavior and Personality, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 166-168.

12. Doreen m. (2001), Space, Place and Gender. Mineaolis: University of Minnesota Press.

13. Dorsey BJ 1996. Gender Inequalities in Education in the Southern African Region — Analysis of

Intervention Strategies. Harare: UNESCO.

14. Dudu W. Gonye J. Mareva R.and Sibanda J, (2008). The Gender Sensitivity of Zimbabwean Secondary

School Textbooks; Department of Curriculum Studies, Great Zimbabwe University, Masvingo,

Zimbabwe.

15. Eagly, A. H., Wood,W. and Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social Role Theory of Sex Differences and

Similarities: A Current Appraisal, in T. Eckes. and H. M. Trautner, (Eds.),The Developmental Social

Psychology of Gender (123–174). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

16. Forseth, U. (2005). Gendered Bodies and Boundary Setting in the Airline Industry. In D. Morgan, B.

Brandth, and E. Kvande, (Eds.), Gender, Body, Work. London: Ashgate.

17. Gachukia, E. Women in Education. In Kabira Wanjiku et al. (2018). Changing the Mainstream:

Celebrating Women’s resilience. Nairobi: University of Nairobi.

18. Gaidzanwa R 1992. UNICEF Update: Women in Higher Posts. Harare: UNICEF.

19. Genene, M. (2003). Bridge Building between Ethopia and Austria, Presentation Paper. International

Institute of Rural Reconstruction, Addis Ababa.

20. Gramsci A. (1994), Selection from the Prison Notebooks. London: Lawrence.

21. Jafari, Aliakbar, and Pauline Maclaran. 2014. Escaping into theWorld of Make-up Routines in Iran.

Page 3047

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

The Sociological Review 62: 359-382.

22. Ferrant, Gaëlle, Luca Maria Pesando, and Keiko Nowacka. 2014. Unpaid Care Work: The Missing

Link in the Analysis of Gender Gaps in labour Outcomes, OECD Development Centre. December.

Available online: https://www.oecd.org/dev/development-gender/Unpaid_care_work.pdf (accessed on

18 June 2020).

23. Franzway, S. Sharp, R. Mills, Julie E. and Gill, J. (2009). Engineering Diversity: The Problem of

Gender Equity in Engineering. Frontiers: A Journal of Women’s Studies, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 89-106.

24. Hartmann H, (2002). The unhappy marriage of Marxism and feminism: Towards a more progressive

union. In: S Dale, F Island, S Ferguson, M MacDonald (Eds.): Politics, Patriarchy and Practice:

Educators and the State. New York: The Falmer Press.

25. Heckman, J. J. Stixrud, J. and Urzua, S. (2006). The Effects of Cognitive and Noncognitive Abilities on

Labor Market Outcomes and Social Behavior. Journal of Labor Economics, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 411-

482.

26. Heilman, M. E. (2012), Gender Stereotypes and Workplace Bias. Research in Organizational Behavior,

Vol. 32, pp. 113-135.

27. Isazadegan, Ali, Javad Amani, and Javad Soltan Ahmadi. 2013. The Effect of Gendered Clichés on

Femininity and Masculinity on Students’ Irrational Ideas and Perfectionism in Mahabad. Psychological

Studies, AL Zahra University 9: 129–48. (In Farsi)

28. Kazemipour, S. 2004. Changes in Marriage Age in Iran and Factors Affecting It. Women’s Studies

Journal 2: 103-124.

29. Koenig, A. M. Eagly, A. H. Mitchell, A. A. and Ristikari, T. (2011). Are Leader Stereotype Masculine?

A Meta-Analysis of Three Research Paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 137, No. 4, pp. 616-642.

30. Lefkowitz, E. S. and Zeldow, P. B. (2006), Masculinity and Femininity Predict Optimal Mental Health:

A Belated Test of the Androgyny Hypothesis. Journal of Personality Assessment, Vol. 87, No. 1, pp.

95-101.

31. Longwe S & Clarke R 1999, Towards Improved Leadership for Women’s Empowerment in Africa:

Measuring Progress and Improved Strategies. Accra: Leadership Forum.

32. Myers, K. (2007). Gender watch: …still watching. Stoke-On-Trent: Trentham

33. Mahlase S 1997. The Careers of Women Teachers Under Apartheid. Harare: SAPES.

34. Mueller, G. and Plug, S. E. (2006). Estimating the Effect of Personality on Male-Female Earnings.

Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 60, No. 1, pp. 3-22.

35. Mintso, T. Opening address at Gender Strategy Workshop, 30-31 January, Johannesburg, 1997.

36. National Gender Policy in Zimbabwe 2004. Harare: Government of Zimbabwe.

37. Nziramasanga Commission 1999. Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Education and

Training in Zimbabwe). Harare: Government Printers.

38. Odaga A. and Heneveld W. (1995), Girls and schools in Sub-Saharan Africa: From analysis to action.

World Bank Technical Paper Series, 298(14): 28-29, 49, 54.

39. Ozkan, T. and Lajunen, T. (2005). Masculinity, Femininity, and the BEM Sex Role Inventory in

Turkey. Sex Roles, Vol. 52, No. 1-2, pp. 103-110.

40. Qarakhani, Masoumeh. 2007. Young Girls and Feminine Values (a study among secondary school

students in Tehran). Journal of Cultural Studies and Communication 3: 73-100.

41. Rudman, L. A. and Phelan, J. E. (2008). Backlash Effects for Disconfirming Gender Stereotypes in

Organizations. In A. P. Brief, and B. M. Staw, (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behaviour (4: 61-79).

New York, Elsevier.

42. Schein, V. E. (2001). A Global Look at Psychological Barriers to Women’s Progress in Management.

Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 57, No. 4, pp. 675-688.

43. Talcott Parsons (1961), An Outline of the Social System p.36-47, from Edward A. Shils, Kaspar D.

Naegle, and Jesse R. Pitts (editors). Theories of Society (New York: Simon & Schuster, The Free

Press).

44. UNESCO (2011). Priority gender equality guidelines. Paris: UNESCO Publications Board

http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/BSP/GENDER/GE%20Guidelines%20Dec

ember%202_FINAL.pdf

45. Unger, R and Crawford, M. (1992) Women and Gender: A Feminist Psychology. London: McGraw

Hill.

Page 3048

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

46. United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund. (2007). The state of the world’s children 2007: Executive

summary: Women and children: the double dividend of gender equality. Retrieved from

http://www.unicef.org/sowc07/report/full_report.php

47. United Nations Report (2010) The United Nations Today. United Nations of Public

Information. New York.

48. Vongas, J. G. and Al Hajj, R. (2015). The Evolution of Empathy and Women’s Precarious Leadership

Appointments. Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 6, pp. 1751-1765.

49. Vaughan, R. (2016). Gender equality and education in the Sustainable Development Goals.

UNESCO:Global Education Education

Monitoringhttp://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002455/245574E.pdf

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002455/245574E.pdf

50. Wajcman, J. (2000). Feminism Facing Industrial relations in Britain. British Journal of Industrial

Relations. Vol. 38, No.2, pp. 183-201.

51. Wayne, J. H. and Cordeiro, B. L. (2003). Who is Good Organizational Citizen? Social Perception of

Male and Female Employees Who Use Family Leave. Sex Roles, Vol. 49, No. 5-6 ,pp. 233-246.

52. Williams, M. J. Levy Paluck, E. and Spender-Rodgers J. (2010). The Masculinity of Money: Automatic

Stereotypes Predict Gender Differences in Estimated Wages. Psychology of Women Quarterly, Vol.

34, No. 1, pp. 7-10.

53. Xiumei, Y. Meifang, W. and Qing, Z. (2012). Effects of Gender Stereotypes on Spontaneous Trait

Inferences and the Moderating Role of Gender Schematicity: Evidence from Chinese Undergraduates.

Social Cognition, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 220–231.

54. Zokaei, Mohammad, Behjat Yazdkhasti, and Ali Yaghoobi. 2001. Typology of Masculinities in Ethnic

Groups of Gilan Province. Social Science Quarterly 55: 93–130. (In Farsi)

Page 3049

www.rsisinternational.org